ASA ruling: a video that made an all-in-one food diet look fine

Key takeaway: A look back at a ruling from 30 September 2026: an anecdote can be a health claim, and a story can make an unhealthy habit look acceptable. The ASA judges the overall message of an ad, not just the sentence that carries the claim.

No ruling on health or nutrition claims for food supplements, or for food and drink, was published between 22 and 28 October 2026. This post looks back at the newest relevant ruling that we had not yet covered. It was about video ads.

A video ad that made an all-food-replacement diet look fine

The claim: A food brand ran the same video as an Instagram post and as a YouTube pre-roll ad. In it, the founder and a guest talked about people who eat only the brand's products. The guest told a story about a competitor in a 260 km rainforest race who ate nothing else and "won by miles". The founder said the product "gives you everything that you do need". He also said that, ideally, people should have "nutritionally complete whole food".

The rule: CAP Code rule 1.3 (social responsibility) and rules 15.1, 15.1.1 and 15.2 (food, food supplements and health claims). Only specific health claims authorised on the GB nutrition and health claims register may be made for food and drink. A general health claim is allowed only if it comes with a relevant specific authorised claim.

Why it failed: The ASA found two problems, and upheld both.

• Irresponsible advertising. The ads did not tell people to replace all their meals, and the founder said he had the product only for some meals. But the story ended with exceptional sporting success, which cancelled out the guest's scepticism. The ASA decided the ads presented eating only this product as acceptable, even for very demanding exercise. It also noted that each serving gave up to 400 calories, so replacing meals would take several servings a day, and the ads did not say so. It found that this condoned an irresponsible dietary habit.
• Unauthorised health claims. The ads never said the product caused the win. But the story, set against the guest's expectation that the runner would fail, implied a link between the product and endurance and athletic performance. That is a specific health claim, and the ASA saw no evidence that it was authorised. "Gives you everything that you do need" was read as a general health claim about the nutrition the body needs, with no specific authorised claim next to it.

The advertiser argued that the line was only a statement about what the product contains. The ASA read it from the consumer's point of view, in the context of the whole discussion.

A compliant alternative: The ruling does not say which nutrients the product declares in a way we can match to the register, so we cannot offer an authorised wording. There is no authorised claim for this; the safe option is to drop it. For the performance anecdote and for the "complete nutrition" line alike, leave the claim out, and do not use a story to imply what you cannot state.

Source: ASA ruling

What to check in your own ads

• Stories are claims. A testimonial or anecdote that links your product to performance or health is judged like a written claim.
• Check what the ad condones. Showing one extreme habit as a success can breach the social responsibility rule, even when other parts of the ad are careful.
• "Everything you need" is a health claim. Wording about complete nutrition needs a specific authorised claim beside it, or it should go.
• Disclaimers do not undo the overall message. A cautious line in one part of a video did not outweigh a story that pointed the other way.

See our example report, or check yours.

Check your own ads before they go live – claimbob.co.uk

This is not legal advice.